This area is in work but for now, here is an introduction, a few links, and some references:
"For that which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it. Every one thinks chiefly of his own, hardly at all of the common interest; and only when he is himself concerned as an individual. For besides other considerations, everybody is more inclined to neglect the duty which he expects another to fulfill; as in families many attendants are often less useful than a few. Each citizen will have a thousand sons who will not be his sons individually but anybody will be equally the son of anybody, and will therefore be neglected by all alike."Unless you are in certain specialties of Liberal Arts in the academic world, you probably have never heard the term, Social Dilemmas. Like me, you may have read a little bit about the Prisoner's Dilemma a few years ago when it received some publicity in well known publications such as Scientific American. Most of you probably dismissed the Prisoner's Dilemma story as just another academic construction with little real significance. But I like puzzles, paradoxes, and examples of the apparent diabolical nature of the universe, so I became very interested in the subject and continued to give it much thought. From the Prisoner's Dilemma "game" I drifted into the more general and much more significant field of the Social Dilemmas. What I have found is that this little field of study, tucked away in several obscure corners of academia and little known by the general public, is concerned with one of most serious and baffling problems in the civilized world today! Uncontrolled government spending, the deterioration of the public schools, the near collapse of law and order, the loss of individual freedom, out of control welfare programs, teenage sexual promiscuity, are just a few examples that result from the Social Dilemmas.
-- From Aristotle's "Politics", Written c.a. 350 BC
So, I hope you will check out what I have to say here and whether you agree or disagree, let me know.
At this point in the explanation, most people get their hackles up and say such things as "Only a real jerk would intentionally freeload on a picnic, or such, without at least trying to contribute their share". True, but don't be too quick to dismiss the possibility that even you might freeride! It depends on the circumstances, especially the cost. For example, most people routinely try to avoid paying any more taxes than they have to. I would say you're freeriding, particularly if you are getting more in services from the government than you are paying. Go to "examples" for more. Follow the links for more details.
Game Theory provides a methodology for analyzing interactions between players more than it provides solutions. While it has had some success in analyzing the Prisoner's Dilemma, it hasn't provided much insight into the general Social Dilemma problem.
A good introduction to Game Theory is available from Roger A. McCain's course notes. Click here for just an introduction or here for the table of contents for the complete set.
A extensive critique of the rational choice view is given by Michael Byron, Jr.'s dissertation, Rationality and the Paradoxes of Decision Theory: A Critique of Rational Choice Views and is recommended reading.
An excellent book on the subject that provides both a critique of the failures of Rational Choice Theory as well as an introduction to the concepts involved is the book, Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory by Donald P. Green and Ian Shapiro, (Copyright 1994, Yale University Press).
Some links on the net: Hans O. Melberg's essay on "Three arguments about rational choice theory in sociology", a brief description of Public Choice, and a list of Jon Elster's many papers on the subject.
For now the best reference on this subject that I can suggest is a book by Geoffrey Brennan and Loren Lomasky called Democracy and decision, 1993, published by Cambridge University Press. Dr. Lomasky also has an article titled "The Booth and Consequences", subtitled "Why Vote?", in the November 1992 issue of Reason magazine where he is a contributing editor. Both the article and the book present a very even handed, factual account of this field and -- most refreshingly -- they are not your usual liberal pap or conservative hysteria.
An interesting article from the Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1985, "The Human Brain, Social Conformity, and Presidential Elections",by Stephen Coleman, suggests -- with supporting evidence -- that people who vote and their selection of a candidate are mainly conforming to social norms. He further says, "If a society is conformist to a certain degree in getting people to vote, it will be conformist to the same degree in how the vote divides among the political parties." So much for critical and objective analysis by the electorate!
For my view on the sloppy thinking involved with "wasting your vote" (when you vote for candidate that is not a Republican or a Democrat), see the essay, "How to Avoid Wasting Your Vote" (A slightly shorter version is at The Vagabond).
My essay, "An Introduction to Public Choice Theory" is now available for your perusal.
A complete text on the Theory of Public Choice is now available on the internet. This outstanding and comprehensive essay is provided by J. Patrick Gunning at his site, UNDERSTANDING DEMOCRACY. While you are at that site, you might want to click on the "Go back to Home" link at the bottom of the page to see other relevant material.
I have made an effort to look at politics with common sense in my essay on Political Realities. To learn more consult the references, particularly books by Buchanan, Olson, Hardin, and Taylor.
Many people make a logical error -- the so-called "False Dilemma" argument -- in assuming that government is the solution to the Social Dilemmas. The argument is based on the idea that "given the claims A and B, if A is false, B must be true". That is, we know that free enterprise fails when it comes to the problem of public goods so government must be the answer! Wrong. Government could be worse. See the article by Adam Przeworski, "A Better Democracy, A Better Economy" that discusses the problem in a somewhat even-handed way.
Mark Irving Lichbach provides the most comprehensive discussion of potential solutions to the Social Dilemmas in his book, The Cooperator's Dilemma (University of Michigan Press, 1996). I say potential solutions since all the solutions he proposes have serious defects. Here is a list of solutions he proposes:
The Market solution is based on modifying the "cost/benefit" equation so that the benefit to the individual exceeds the cost. The main problem with this approach is that is simply not possible for many public goods.
Community solutions are based on the idea that members of the community can develop common understandings that they will act together. Of course, this relies on trust which is not practical in many communities. The main problem, however, is that this solution requires that people be altruistic rather than egoistic, which is, practically, not very realistic.
Contract solutions are based on the concept that individuals can recognize that human weaknesses include the problem of freeriding and defection and therefore may make contracts between themselves to severely punish such actions. The problem is that someone must enforce these contracts and therefore a police agency must be established. This, of course, is the beginnings of government and we know where that will lead us!
This concept requires that an hierarchical organization exist with enough power at the top to enforce the needed cooperation. Of course, we are talking about government here as Hobbes described it in his works. The problems resulting from this solution are major, as is discussed extensively in these essays.
1. By metering, I mean the charging for the use of a good based on its economic value or cost.
Back to my home page.